Doozy hiding in Clinton's op-ed in USA Today...

[Sunburn74]

But man they quietly slipped in a freaking doozy

"To break the gridlock in Washington, we need to get secret, unaccountable money out of our politics. It’s drowning out the voices of the American people. So within my first 30 days, I will introduce a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. We should be protecting citizens’ rights to vote, not corporations’ rights to buy elections."

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opini...-look-for-common-ground/ar-AAk0Zzw?li=BBnb7Kz
Can read the full thing here.

Are you kidding me? How is this not getting more press? This is huge!

 

[MrSquished]

But man they quietly slipped in a freaking doozy

"To break the gridlock in Washington, we need to get secret, unaccountable money out of our politics. It’s drowning out the voices of the American people. So within my first 30 days, I will introduce a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. We should be protecting citizens’ rights to vote, not corporations’ rights to buy elections."

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opini...-look-for-common-ground/ar-AAk0Zzw?li=BBnb7Kz
Can read the full thing here.

Are you kidding me? How is this not getting more press? This is huge!

she has said that before. but most americans have no idea what Citizen's United is. They'd rather believe that Clinton murdered Vince Foster, her house got raided by the NYPD, or Biden said they'd pardon her no matter what. What this election has taught me is that many Americans are even dumber than I thought after they voted for Dubya a second time. And that was pretty fucking dumb.

 

[chowderhead]

Vote Democratic to get more reps in Congress and get Clinton to appoint judges to the appellate court and the SCotUS who will overturn Citizens United. She said it over and over and at the debate. She wants to overturn Citizens United.

 

[Sunburn74]

I watched all the debates from start to finish. I never once heard her bring it up.

Just like last week, for the first time Trump said something about limiting term limits for congressmen.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

I watched all the debates from start to finish. I never once heard her bring it up.

Just like last week, for the first time Trump said something about limiting term limits for congressmen.

Then you haven't been paying attention to what she has been campaigning for. She has been saying an amendment proposal to overturn Citizens United for a very long time.

 

[chowderhead]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/19/hillary-clinton-heres-what-i-want-in-the-supreme-court.html
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-...pt-clinton-trump-20161009-snap-htmlstory.html

She wants to overturn Citizens United and said so at the second AND third debate when the Supreme Court question came up. She said it many times also during the Democratic debates.

 

[Sunburn74]

Man how did I miss that one? Then this a freaking no brainer decision. Heck honestly if Trump had said
1) I'll put term limits on congressmen
2) I'll repeal citizen united

and hillary didn't, I seriously would have had a bit of a dilemma.

 

[woolfe9998]

In California, one of our ballot measures is an advisory vote to determine if the people want the state legislature to vote in a new amendment to overturn Citizens United. It has a huge lead in the polls.

Unfortunately, it's nigh impossible in this divided political climate to amend the Constitution, no matter what is being proposed.

 

[dank69]

Man how did I miss that one? Then this a freaking no brainer decision. Heck honestly if Trump had said
1) I'll put term limits on congressmen
2) I'll repeal citizen united

and hillary didn't, I seriously would have had a bit of a dilemma.

Term limits are an awful idea. Our only power over politicians is to vote them out of office when they don't represent us anymore. The term lame duck was coined for a reason. Once a representative is no longer constrained by re-election concerns they are free to fuck us over.

 

[1prophet]

But man they quietly slipped in a freaking doozy

"To break the gridlock in Washington, we need to get secret, unaccountable money out of our politics. It’s drowning out the voices of the American people. So within my first 30 days, I will introduce a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. We should be protecting citizens’ rights to vote, not corporations’ rights to buy elections."

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opini...-look-for-common-ground/ar-AAk0Zzw?li=BBnb7Kz
Can read the full thing here.

Are you kidding me? How is this not getting more press? This is huge!

Probably because it is just grandstanding and feel good pandering so she can get more of the Bernie type voters aboard but in reality it is just empty rhetoric that isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
https://theintercept.com/2016/07/18...-small-donor-matching-pledge-definitely-does/

Presidents play essentially no role in amending the Constitution. Any amendment Clinton proposed would have to be passed by a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate, and then would have to be ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.

That’s never going to happen. The U.S. has amended the Constitution just once in the past 45 years, with the non-earthshaking 27th Amendment prohibiting Congress from voting itself a pay raise that takes effect before the next election. (Moreover, the 27th Amendment was submitted to the states in 1789; it then took 203 years for three-fourths of the states to ratify it in 1992.)

So Clinton’s constitutional amendment pledge is empty grandstanding. Citizens United will either be overturned by the Supreme Court, or it will remain law.

 

[dank69]

Probably because it is just grandstanding and feel good pandering so she can get more of the Bernie type voters aboard but in reality it is just empty rhetoric that isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
https://theintercept.com/2016/07/18...-small-donor-matching-pledge-definitely-does/

It still exposes who votes for and against it, and you'll continue to ignore that all who vote against it come from your beloved GOP.

 

[ElFenix]

I still have no idea how creations of the state of Delaware have rights beyond those granted to them specifically by the state of Delaware

But then I also understand how terrible it would be for the government to decide which companies can buy time on a printing press and which can't.

 

[bshole]

Term limits are an awful idea. Our only power over politicians is to vote them out of office when they don't represent us anymore. The term lame duck was coined for a reason. Once a representative is no longer constrained by re-election concerns they are free to fuck us over.

And thus we get hacks like Orrin Hatch stick like a tick in congress for nearly half a fucking century. Forty years of fighting for the rich and look at what he has accomplished.

You are wrong. The longer these parasites stay in office the more responsive they become to SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS and the wealthy. The only way to have an oligarchy is with politicians that are always looking to the next election and needing money for said election. It is worse than that though. A lot of payoffs are in the form of paid speaking fees and made up positions when the politician leaves office. The whole system is corrupted almost beyond repair.

 

[dank69]

And thus we get hacks like Orrin Hatch stick like a tick in congress for nearly half a fucking century. Forty years of fighting for the rich and look at what he has accomplished.

You are wrong. The longer these parasites stay in office the more responsive they become to SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS and the wealthy. The only way to have an oligarchy is with politicians that are always looking to the next election and needing money for said election. It is worse than that though. A lot of payoffs are in the form of paid speaking fees and made up positions when the politician leaves office. The whole system is corrupted almost beyond repair.

How long someone has been in office has nothing to do with how corrupt they are. If you imposed term limits Bernie would have been gone long ago. With term limits, the wealthy can just buy fresh new corrupt candidates to replace the expired ones.

 

[thraashman]

Top things that need to be done to fix elections in this country.
1. Overturn Citizens United.
2. Make ALL voting districts determined by non-partisan committee (no gerrymandering)
3. Eliminate electoral college

 

[dank69]

Top things that need to be done to fix elections in this country.
1. Overturn Citizens United.
2. Make ALL voting districts determined by non-partisan committee (no gerrymandering)
3. Eliminate electoral college

Don't forget instant runoff.

 

[zinfamous]

Pretty sure you can't write an amendment to overturn "__X__ SCOTUS decision"

That, and it is theoretically impossible to draft and pass a new constitutional amendment these days.

Every candidate makes this same "new amendment!" promise because it's populist BS that plays well to the uninformed plebs. I would like to see someone making real efforts to improving history, civics, electoral education among the public. As David Souter said (Assuming he was quoting someone else): "The greatest threat to our republic is an uninformed citizenry."

 

[hal2kilo]

Pretty sure you can't write an amendment to overturn "__X__ SCOTUS decision"

That, and it is theoretically impossible to draft and pass a new constitutional amendment these days.

Every candidate makes this same "new amendment!" promise because it's populist BS that plays well to the uninformed plebs. I would like to see someone making real efforts to improving history, civics, electoral education among the public. As David Souter said (Assuming he was quoting someone else): "The greatest threat to our republic is an uninformed citizenry."

Yea, getting 34 state legislatures to agree on an amendment to the constitution is a piece of cake didn't you know. But, I'm forgetting what powerful alpha leadership is capable of.

 

[thraashman]

Pretty sure you can't write an amendment to overturn "__X__ SCOTUS decision"

That, and it is theoretically impossible to draft and pass a new constitutional amendment these days.

Every candidate makes this same "new amendment!" promise because it's populist BS that plays well to the uninformed plebs. I would like to see someone making real efforts to improving history, civics, electoral education among the public. As David Souter said (Assuming he was quoting someone else): "The greatest threat to our republic is an uninformed citizenry."

A SCOTUS decision is basically saying "The Constitution allows or disallows X". So writing a Constitutional Amendment would be changing the Constitution so that it now doesn't allow money in politics whereas the SCOTUS previously said it did. It would have to be worded properly to be able to do such and I am no legal expert so I don't know what it would have to say. It wouldn't say "Citizens United is overturned" but instead something like "Money is not speech and individuals or groups other than candidates may not spend money in an attempt to influence the outcome of an election".

 

[sdifox]

Top things that need to be done to fix elections in this country.
1. Overturn Citizens United.
2. Make ALL voting districts determined by non-partisan committee (no gerrymandering)
3. Eliminate electoral college

You got my vote

 

[glenn1]

A SCOTUS decision is basically saying "The Constitution allows or disallows X". So writing a Constitutional Amendment would be changing the Constitution so that it now doesn't allow money in politics whereas the SCOTUS previously said it did. It would have to be worded properly to be able to do such and I am no legal expert so I don't know what it would have to say. It wouldn't say "Citizens United is overturned" but instead something like "Money is not speech and individuals or groups other than candidates may not spend money in an attempt to influence the outcome of an election".

If you think gutting the Bill of Rights to (incorrectly) boost your election prospects is a good thing then you shouldn't be voting. If you think that one of the biggest problems with the country (or event that it's a problem at all) is that General Electric or whatever company can buy advertising saying "don't vote for ____" you are a fool.

 

[thraashman]

If you think gutting the Bill of Rights to (incorrectly) boost your election prospects is a good thing then you shouldn't be voting. If you think that one of the biggest problems with the country (or event that it's a problem at all) is that General Electric or whatever company can buy advertising saying "don't vote for ____" you are a fool.

If you think selling our elections to the highest bidder is a good idea, you're a moron... I mean, I already know you're a moron, this is just an example of why.

 

[glenn1]

If you think selling our elections to the highest bidder is a good idea, you're a moron... I mean, I already know you're a moron, this is just an example of why.

LOL at you thinking paid advertising is "selling our elections." You must really likewise hate where in the Bill of Rights where it says we have right of redress of grievances. I guess you're only down with that one if you put a big asterisk after it with a disclaimer "does not apply if you're someone who might vote against the person I like or buy advertising against them."

 

[Sunburn74]

How long someone has been in office has nothing to do with how corrupt they are. If you imposed term limits Bernie would have been gone long ago. With term limits, the wealthy can just buy fresh new corrupt candidates to replace the expired ones.

Think of it as an extension of the Peter Principle**. If you are a senator and stay a senator, you are likely just borderline competent and possibly even bad at your job, but you will almost never be demoted.

Arbitrary term limits would be a feature to minimize the impact of borderline competent or even incompetent people.

**The peter principle basically says people get promoted until the point of borderline competence or even incompetence (for example, a good science teacher gets promoted to principal and if he's good at that then to superintendent and so on and so on). The issue is skills from one job are often not translatable to the next and people advance due to past performance not future performance. Ultimately you reach a ceiling of borderline competence where you then stagnate.